<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] "Liaison Statement from the IAB to the ICANN Board on Technical Use of Domain Names"
- To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] "Liaison Statement from the IAB to the ICANN Board on Technical Use of Domain Names"
- From: Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 23:56:40 +0000
- Accept-language: en-AU, en-US
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: Ac/RP4hNwkJbi6auTHKLyhJzOKAzowAAQ9Fg
- Thread-topic: "Liaison Statement from the IAB to the ICANN Board on Technical Use of Domain Names"
From: http://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1351/
Liaison Statement: Liaison Statement from the IAB to the ICANN Board on
Technical Use of Domain Names
Submission Date: 2014-09-15
From: The IAB (Russ Housley)
We are writing this note in order to share with you some work in the IETF
regarding domain names for "technical use," as described in RFC 2860.
In RFC 2860 ("Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority," June 2000), the IAB acknowledged the
authority of ICANN for policies relating to the assignment of domain names, but
retained authority over "assignments of domain names for technical use"
(Section 4.3, pg 2):
"4.3. Two particular assigned spaces present policy issues in addition to the
technical considerations specified by the IETF:
the assignment of domain names, and
the assignment of IP address blocks.
These policy issues are outside the scope of this MOU.
Note that
(a) assignments of domain names for technical uses (such as domain names for
inverse DNS lookup),
(b) assignments of specialised address blocks (such as multicast or anycast
blocks), and
(c) experimental assignments
are not considered to be policy issues, and shall remain subject to the
provisions of this Section 4."
In order to support appropriate technical use of domain names in the context of
its protocol development work, the IETF approved RFC 6761 ("Special-Use Domain
Names," February 2013). As directed, IANA established and populated a registry
for such special-use names
(http://www.iana.org/assignments/special-use-domain-names/special-use-domain-names.xhtml
).
Recently, several requests have come to the IETF for names to be added to the
special-use domain names registry
(See:
http://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-chapin-additional-reserved-tlds-01.txt
and
http://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names-02.txt
).
Discussion of these requests under the process established in RFC 6761 has
revealed difficulties in applying its guidelines in practice.
Under its current charter, the DNSOP working group in the IETF is responsible
to review and clarify the overlap between (among other
things) the special names registry from RFC 6761 and the public DNS root. This
could include consideration of the problem of existing name collisions,
provision of additional guidelines, or further modification to the process in
RFC 6761 to reduce the potential for collisions in the future. Any changes are
to be kept within the constraints of RFC 2860 (or any future modification to
RFC 2860).
All such discussion and any modification will be open and transparent to
participation by interested parties, in accordance with established IETF
processes. We invite participation of interested parties, including members of
the ICANN community, in this work.
On behalf of the IAB,
Russ Housley
IAB Chair
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|